Schooliform

[icowden]

It's weird how you grant yourself this exceptionalism.
You, yourself, say that your daughter got better GCSE grades than if she had attended a state school.
Not sure how this differs from any parent lucky to be wealthy enough to afford private education.

Because you are still failing to understand. My daughter did get better grades than if she had attended a state school but not necessarily significantly better grades than she would have got had she attended state school and not had dyslexia.

Lets say that she got an 8 in English. Private schools normally maintain that they have enhanced results over stats so in state she might have been expected to get a 7. However due to dyslexia and the lack of support it is more likely that she would have got a 5 or 6. Her education was aimed at letting her perform on a level playing field.

But pay your tax like the rest of us do.

I do. And probably more than you.

 

[multitool]

I do. And probably more than you.

Shall we add that to all your other ad hominems?

 

[BoldonLad]

Because you are still failing to understand. My daughter did get better grades than if she had attended a state school but not necessarily significantly better grades than she would have got had she attended state school and not had dyslexia.

Lets say that she got an 8 in English. Private schools normally maintain that they have enhanced results over stats so in state she might have been expected to get a 7. However due to dyslexia and the lack of support it is more likely that she would have got a 5 or 6. Her education was aimed at letting her perform on a level playing field.



I do. And probably more than you.

Life is not a level playing field, get used to it

 

[icowden]

Life is not a level playing field, get used to it

Like any good parent, I will do what it takes to level it. The point being laboured is that removing VAT isn't the penalty on the rich that people think it is.

 

[multitool]

A couple of posts back you were boasting that you are richer than me.

 

[BoldonLad]

Like any good parent, I will do what it takes to level it. The point being laboured is that removing VAT isn't the penalty on the rich that people think it is.

Personally, since I consider myself a "good parent", I would say I will do what I can to level it.

 

[C R]

Like any good parent, I will do what it takes to level it. The point being laboured is that removing VAT isn't the penalty on the rich that people think it is.

VAT is a distraction, it is the charitable status that is the problem.

 

[icowden]

A couple of posts back you were boasting that you are richer than me.

Nope. Paying more tax doesn't necessarily equate to being richer. And it wasn't boasting - it was pointing out that I already pay quite enough tax.

 

[icowden]

VAT is a distraction, it is the charitable status that is the problem.

There are ways to put that to good use. In some places, Private Schools are encouraged to use their equipment, facilities and charitable status to mentor and assist state schools. Worcester has a good model for this with Kings Worcester being heavily involved in outreach and support to the state sector.

I don't disagree with the removal of charitable status or VAT exemption in principle. I disagree with the way that the change is being proposed and the constant packaging of it as being a tax break for the rich. I have a similar issue with people wanting to increase the 40% and 45% tax threshold to get more money from the rich. Those bands are quite thin because once you are in the 45% tax bracket the first thing your money does is go to a good accountant who finds a nice home for it in the Cayman islands or similar.

Personally I think we should move away from personal taxation to transactional taxation. Purchases from Apple, Amazon etc make huge profits for those companies but they end up paying next to no tax on those profits.

 

[multitool]

Nope. Paying more tax doesn't necessarily equate to being richer. And it wasn't boasting - it was pointing out that I already pay quite enough tax.

No, you were comparing the tax you pay with what you think I might pay and claiming that you pay more than me, therefore a boast that you earn more than me:

I do. And probably more than you.

Not sure why you are trying to lie. Your post is there for all to see.

 

[icowden]

No, you were comparing the tax you pay with what you think I might pay and claiming that you pay more than me, therefore a boast that you earn more than me:
Not sure why you are trying to lie. Your post is there for all to see.

Yes, but sadly your black and white interpretation is incorrect. The problem with text is it lacks nuance.

 

[multitool]

Yes, but sadly your black and white interpretation is incorrect. The problem with text is it lacks nuance.

Why did you say that you pay more tax than me?

What is the nuance I'm missing?

 

[icowden]

Why did you say that you pay more tax than me?
What is the nuance I'm missing?

This:-

And it wasn't boasting - it was pointing out that I already pay quite enough tax.

I pay tax on my salary plus through my limited company corporation tax, VAT on invoices, tax on any money that comes out of my company after I have generated the money that goes into the company, National Insurance and Council Tax. I sit corrected if you also run your own limited company.

 

[multitool]

This:-

I pay tax on my salary plus through my limited company corporation tax, VAT on invoices, tax on any money that comes out of my company after I have generated the money that goes into the company, National Insurance and Council Tax. I sit corrected if you also run your own limited company.

Nah.

Invoking me in your claim that you already pay "quite enough tax" is irrelevant and adds nothing to the concept of you paying "quite enough tax".

You cited me to make a comparison. But you've no idea how much tax I pay. You know almost nothing about me other than a rough estimate of age, and that I have children.

As boasts and sneers go, it was pretty pathetic. But then you have been slinging around personal insults, haven't you. It's also spectacularly dim-witted, given that people pay tax on earnings. You claim to be a high-earner but not wealthy. You've extra disposable income to spend on luxury education... money that the majority don't have...but in your mind that doesn't matter because you make endless exceptions for yourself, one of them being that you "care" about your children, therefore implying that others don't.

And anyone can have a Limited company. You doubtless have one as a potential tax dodge. To add to you not paying VAT on your luxury purchase.

It is clear that you have a somewhat massive sense of entitlement, and view yourself as some sort of exception to the moral framework that us little people live by.

 

[The Crofted Crest]

Life is not a level playing field, get used to it

That is one thing no one should ever get used to!